It
has been almost 18 months since Saudi Arabian forces intervened in
the ongoing Yemeni civil war, and unfortunately the UK government has
stayed true to Philip Hammond's promise. Since he made it, over
7000 people
have been killed, 2.8
million
have been displaced and vital infrastructure has been destroyed.

The
United Nations (UN) has called
for an international investigation
into the human rights abuses that have taken place on all sides of
the conflict, a move that will no doubt be resisted by the Saudi
authorities.

From
the limited investigations that the UN has been able to conduct, it
is clear that the bombing campaign has violated international
humanitarian law. Earlier this year, a leaked report
documented 119 stories relating to violations of international
humanitarian law (IHL) including air strikes on civilian targets and
starvation being used as a war tactic.

Another
report, produced earlier this month, followed-up specific
allegations, again accusing the Saudi forces of deliberately
bombing civilian targets.
"It is almost certain that the civilian house was the deliberate
target of the high explosive aircraft bombs," it
said,
while focusing on a particular case that killed four children. It
concluded that the coalition had failed to take precautions and had
"thus violated international humanitarian law."

The
international pressure has forced the Saudi-led coalition to carry
out its own investigation. Needless to say, what they produced was a
whitewash that largely
exonerated them of any wrongdoing.
However, even it had to concede that civilians were being killed.

One
example the Saudi report cited as a "mistake" was the
bombing
of a residential compound
that killed 65 people, claiming
that the victims died as the “unintended bombing based on
inaccurate intelligence information.” The "regrets" may
feel half-hearted and insincere, but the fact that even Saudi forces
have had to concede the point is a sign of how overwhelming the
evidence and international condemnation has been.

The
political situation on the ground is in a stalemate, with another
round of peace talks scheduled
to take place in September.
Unfortunately, with the humanitarian crisis getting worse, there is
little reason to think they will be any more successful than the last
ones.

Fortunately
for the Saudi regime, it has always been able to rely on the
unbending support of some very powerful allies. Among them is the UK
government, which has only been too happy to provide weapons, support
and a fig leaf of political legitimacy. Since the bombing began it
has licensed over £3.3
billion worth of arms,
including the same kinds of fighter jets and bombs that have been so
central to the devastation.

This
time the parliamentary consensus has began to shift. The Labour, SNP
and Liberal Democrat front benches have all voiced serious concerns
about the humanitarian situation and joined Human Rights Watch,
Oxfam, Amnesty International and other NGOs in calling for greater
access for aid workers and an immediate of arms sales.

It’s
story is falling apart though. Last month, in the final hours of the
last day of parliament, the foreign office published written
corrections
that revealed many of its claims about the conduct of the war were
false. Where the record had once said that "The MOD assessment
is that the Saudi-led coalition is not targeting civilians" this
was corrected to the far more equivocal "The MOD has not
assessed that the Saudi-led coalition is targeting civilians."

It
is a subtle but important distinction, and was typical of a series of
changes that shifted the burden of responsibility and suggested that
UK policy was being directed by Saudi-assurances. At best it can be
seen as an act of staggering incompetence on the part of government
ministers, who were effectively conceding that they had "misspoken"
a number of times over a six-month period, and at worst it can be
viewed as an extremely cynically timed admission that they had in
fact distorted the truth.

It
doesn’t stop there though. The inaccurate statements weren’t just
said in parliament, some were also repeated
in the High Court
as part of the evidence in a hearing which saw Campaign Against Arms
Trade winning the right to a judicial review into the legality of
arms sales to the Saudi government for use in Yemen. Whatever the
truth behind the corrections, the government has very serious
questions to answer.

The
hearing, which will last three days, is expected to take place in
January 2017. It will be the first time these arms exports have ever
been examined in a court of law. It is definitely a welcome
development. But, in the meantime, even more arms will be sold, and
more lives will be destroyed.

In
the last few weeks the Guardian and the New York Times have become
the first mainstream newspapers to call for an embargo on arms sales
and an end to hostilities. How many more Yemeni people will have to
die before our government does the same?

This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.
If you have any queries about republishing please contact us.
Please check individual images for licensing details.

Support our campaign into #darkmoney

Theresa May is desperately clinging to power, relying on the DUP, the hard-right party that has blocked same-sex marriage, and kept abortion illegal.

Worse still, they're bankrolled by dark money – we've exposed the shady group behind their lavish pro-Brexit campaigning, but they're still refusing to name their secret donors. Now they hold the balance of power at Westminster, it's even more vital that we find out who their paymasters are.